The timeline was already well into the 19th century before Mexico was added. Actually it was the Lakota/Sioux that moved the timeline further (Battle of Little Bighorn 1876).
2 Likes
give him a F35 phantom and SAS units, why not?
1 Like
British are fine as they are. But I’d be in favor of giving them those cool looking skirmishes. If you don’t want to effect balance just give the them the same stats as longbows, even if their stats were a little different it wouldn’t really effect balance anyway
I think it’d be good to give them a skirmisher and the longbow can remain their archaic unit like other civs have crossbows. I’d be happy with the sharpshooter the US has.
1 Like
i dont think it would actually solve anything giving britain a skirmisher.
is it more historical? yeah
would it hurt balance and uniqueness? without a doubt.
for the sake of the game britain should be left alone.
1 Like
Yes they do, it’s longbows and it’s horribly anachronistic.
No, I’m suggesting the exact same Sharpshooter as the Americans get. They’re roughly equivalent to Longbowmen in nearly every aspect. The only difference is that Longbowmen perform much better against skirmishers/archers and require the Yeomen card to stay on par with them. Sharpshooters only pull ahead with the Paper Cartridge upgrade and the fact that they wouldn’t need to send a card to get to that level (but they do need to spend more resources on the Counter Infantry Rifling upgrade to keep on par with longbows). On maps with Seminole, Longbows could actually be slightly better due to the Seminole Bowyers upgrade.
Just google image searth 95th rifles uniform…and guess what in game unit they look like…
I was using the term Skirmisher to refer to a gunpowder unit with rifles, rather than the simple role of light infantry which includes rifle units and archers. I agree on the anachronism of longbows, so when I play Brits, I try to get Jaegers and the Ranger shipment in Fortress and Industrial respectively. As far as the Yumi reference, I had thought that this proposal would extend the viability of the unit type (Longbow to proposed Sharpshooter) into the late game, but as you had mentioned Brits have cards which already do that.
If anything, to include a gunpowder skirmisher for the British and keep it within balance with the rest of the British Eco, you’d have to make it so that getting skirmishers is rather inconvenient, such as unlocking via shipment.
The Portuguese Cazadores were supplied with British-made equipment and operated closely with the British Rifles during the Peninsular War, hence the similar uniforms. The only real main difference was that the Cazadores wore a tannish brown uniform, whereas the Rifles of course wore Rifle Green.
1 Like
They could have card to unlock Gurkhas/Green Jackets or something in the 3rd or 4th age. But yes the longbowman is AOE2 nostalgia bait it would be like giving the French Knights for their heavy cav rather than Currasiers.
Britain having some relevant light infantry would be great even if they have to wait until the 4th age for it for balance reasons that is fine.
A rifleman with 1.5 rof would be very weird…
There was the fast-firing breech-loading ferguson rifle, but not widely used due to its unreliability (but we already have the short-lived nizam infantry as a super unit, so who cares).
1 Like
For any of such changes to old civs, use the Ottoman Nizam reform as a great model:
- Useful
- Not going to affect the well-established Ottoman play style. You’ll need to do some extra investments to get them.
- Not going to change the Ottoman unit composition drastically because the units are limited.
- Opens up an entirely new build order
A shipment of strong gurkhas would be good. Maybe like consulate level so with 10% extra stats like the units you can train from forts as the US.
I think it would actually make them less of a “skirm”-goon civ. Longbows perform better against other light infantry and the counters to light infantry than Sharpshooters do. Sharpshooters only pull ahead when all their arsenal upgrades are researched, and even then, that mostly just makes them better versus heavy infantry and light cavalry. I think Longbows still deal more damage to heavy cavalry, artillery, and light infantry fully upgraded. With Sharpshooters you actually need a more varied composition, and strong British Musketeers and Hussars play into that.
The difference between Longbowmen and Sharpshooters is very marginal. The only real advantage to giving British Sharpshooters is to free up an extra card since Longbowmen need the Yeomen card to reach their full potential, but Sharpshooters only need Advanced Arsenal which you probably want in your deck anyways as British.
First of all, adding a new semi-unique unit to their roster would increase uniqueness.
In regards to balance, Sharpshooters only actually perform better than Longbows against light cavalry and heavy infantry. That means you would need a more varied unit composition to back up Sharpshooters compared to Longbowmen. The only way it buffs British is that they would no longer need to send the Yeoman card to have a competent “skirmisher” unit, and could use that card slot for something else. On maps where you can access techs like Seminole Bowyers, Longbows would actually still be better than Sharpshooters when fully upgraded.
1 Like
ROF and aiming animation is different. Longbow has a long windup so that they cannot HR well. I believe sharpshooter is now tweaked to be closer to skirmishers.
And the yeoman card looks very conservative now.
The “new” style yeoman card would be:
- Longbows +2 range
- Longbows gain “pailing” ability, giving them 2x melee bonus against cavalry when active
Edit: boy this is a joke showing how stupid some new cards are and I never expect people to start really arguing about this XD
1 Like
Sharpshooters are anti heavy infantry with a 3.5 multiplier, that is the main balance issue.
Take a gander at the stats of the two units.
With the Yeomen card Longbowmen do 21 damage per shot at a ROF of 1.5 (so 42 damage equalized to the ROF of rifle infantry). Turns out Yeomen only adds range, not attack
Longbowmen do 17 damage per shot at a ROF of 1.5 (so 34 damage equalized to the ROF of rifle infantry)
Sharpshooters do 15 damage at a ROF of 3. They also benefit from the Paper Cartridge upgrade tech that doesn’t help Longbowmen, so with that they are at 15 x 1.15 = 17.25.
Multipliers:
Longbowmen (42 damage)
1.25 vs heavy infantry (52.5 damage)
2 vs light cavalry (84 damage)
0.75 vs heavy cavalry (31.5 damage)
Longbowmen (34 damage)
1.25 vs heavy infantry (42.5 damage)
2 vs light cavalry (68 damage)
0.75 vs heavy cavalry (25.5 damage)
Sharpshooter (17.25 damage)
3.5 vs heavy infantry (60.375 damage)
2.5 vs light cavalry (43.125 damage)
0.75 vs heavy cavalry (12.9375 damage)
From those results, Sharpshooters are only better than Longbowmen versus heavy infantry, and much worse versus everything else. They probably actually need an additional card to make people pick them over Longbowmen. Something like “Green Jackets” that boosts their multipliers versus light and heavy cavalry would probably be appropriate (historically, their decisive role at Waterloo was to blunt the charge of the French Gendarmes).
yes please a skirmisher with a bonus vs heavy cav please, im sure that would never be a balance issue in the slightest
2 Likes
DIsagree. Longbows are cool. And see ROGERS RANGERS.
1 Like
Yes because a x1 or x1.25 multiplier instead of x0.75 on a unit with 17.25 attack would be so broken 